The Sounding Board

The psychology of paywalls

I've hit the paywall.

The New York Times unveiled its paywall plan back in March. After reading 20 free articles per month, the paywall kicks in, with a number of different subscription options. As you might expect, there was a lot of backlash, and people who said it would fail. Not long after the launch, we saw a rush of articles explaining how to get around the paywall without a subscription.

Almost six months later, it appears the doubters were wrong, and The New York Times was right. Readers are willing to pay for access to online articles.

But why?

Earlier this month, Poynter published a fantastic article on the psychology of paywalls, answering that very question. In his article, Jeff Sonderland boils the reason for The New York Times' success down to three factors: convenience, appreciation and duty.

If it's always been possible on any given day to pick up the local paper somewhere for free, why did people ever pay? Not because they had to, but because it was easier to get it placed on their doorstep every morning (convenience), because they felt if they were going to read it every day they ought to pay (duty), or because they wanted to support the institution and people that produced it (appreciation). Those are the same three reasons someone might subscribe to The New York Times' digital content. Not because they have to, but because it's easier than hacking your way around it every day, because they remind you occasionally that you should, or just because you want to support the work they do.

Sonderland's fascinating article gives the clearest reasoning I've seen so far on why The New York Times' approach is working. Whether it's because of convenience, appreciation or duty, I, for one, find it encouraging that hundreds of thousands of people are paying for online access to The New York Times instead of sneaking around it.

-Stephanie

Quora threads every startup CEO should be reading

Quora is a fantastic site. If you're not familiar, it's the much hyped question-and-answer site (think Yahoo! Answers, with some Digg-like functionality, popular among the techie and early adopter crowd). Last December and January, it was basically the only thing anyone was talking about, in-part because they came out of the gate with A-list tech question answerers like AOL co-founder Steve Case, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and co-founder Dustin Moskivitz, and heavy hitters from Google, Twitter and Foursquare. Heck, even actor and social entrepreneur Ashton Kutcher uses Quora!

There are a lot of folks who will tell you Quora failed, or at least hasn't lived up to its hype. That's not what this post is about. I've found it to be a great resource for research, and deeper thoughts on issues in the tech industry.

However, outside of the search function and following Topic Groups, finding good threads on Quora was a bit of a pain, in my opinion. Earlier this month they introduced Quora Browse, which is a step in the right direction on curated content.

The other day, I caught a post on the BestVendor blog that is a collection of the "Top Quora Entries Every Startup CEO Should Read." From the best questions on fundraising and building and managing a team, to growing your product and preparing for shifts, BestVendor has pulled together the best of the best. They even pulled together a few threads on getting exposure, though they probably could have added a bullet that simply read "call SpeakerBox and be done with it" (admittedly, I'm biased).

If you're part of the startup community, BestVendor's collection is worth checking out. Even if you're not, there's probably a few threads on Quora right now that are worth your while.

-Stephanie

Enterprise 2.0: Who's Controlling Your Corporate Community?

When It Comes To Success There Are No Shortcuts.

Sugar-Free Internet

"We'll try to make up some time in the air...? Why don't we just go as fast as we can all the time?" -- Jerry Seinfeld      (Image Source: Public Domain)

Katie and I flew out to Detroit last week -- our laptops in tow.

These days, most airlines offer some sort of Wi-Fi-in-the-Sky option. But as a rule, it’s prohibitively expensive and/or difficult to purchase. Pay $4.99 per minute. Sign a seven-page service agreement. Agree to 7 months of Bowflex magazine. Thanks, but no thanks.

So how excited were Katie and I to find 30 minutes of free Wi-Fi on our Delta flight, courtesy of Diet Coke?

No joke, it was just about the best promotion I’ve ever seen. The presentation, the offer, it all worked perfectly. The log-in screen even re-directed to Diet Coke’s Facebook page. How clever is that? If I weren’t so anti-Facebook, I would have “liked” the aspertame out of that page.

Usually, companies sponsor things I don’t care about (or, just as misguidedly -- they sponsor things I take for granted). See, I don’t care if Cheetos sponsors the Oscars, because obviously someone’s going to. It’s not like we won’t have the Oscars this year because Cheetos couldn’t pony up the dough.

But when a company gives me something valuable AND unexpected, the impact is enormous.

Now even better would have been a sponsor with some actual tie-in to the free Wi-Fi. The soda/Internet pairing is a little random. Wouldn’t this be a natural promotion for a company that works in the consumer wireless space?

But here's what I’d really like to see:

“Today we’re going to forgo the flight safety video, courtesy of Red Bull.”

--Jonathan

Apple Moves On

Click on image to enlarge

Thanks for your comment. I don't dispute ther...

Thanks for your comment. I don't dispute there are instances where information regarding material announcements must be kept very close to the vest and shared with only a certain group of people, and perhaps I should have clarified that. However, this does not necessarily pertain to, for example, new product announcements or certain other types of corporate news. I maintain that it would be in the company's best interest to share information on those types of announcements with communications teams as early in the process as possible, so everyone is on the same page in terms of the appropriate messaging.

Also, while I agree agency PR professionals who working on client accounts should defer to their clients, this post was not written purely with PR agency representatives in mind. It also applies to internal corporate communications professionals who are all too often kept in the dark until the very last moment - or even beyond that - when it comes to non-material news events (trust me, I used to be one of those people!).

- Pete

Could not said it better myself, Now that I said t...

Could not said it better myself, Now that I said that I need players to out and play!!

check us out

There are SEC disclosure requirements about who ha...

There are SEC disclosure requirements about who has access to specific information prior to material announcements. You are whining without acknowledging there are legitimate reasons companies and there executives must do this.

If you are asked a question you do not know the answer to you should be deferring to your client in the first place or already know what the company's response is to industry speculation.

What PR People Don't Know Can Hurt Them - And Your Company

Just saw this story on Business Insider that talks about how many PR people are kept out of the loop in regards to issues that are transpiring in the executive offices of the companies they represent. Apparently the website ran a story, based on information from “sources,” that was denied by a corporate spokesperson – only to eventually be proven true. Business Insider’s take is that this happens all too frequently. When it does, it puts the reputation of PR managers at risk and leaves reporters in a difficult position, not knowing whether the info they are receiving is correct or not.


Unfortunately, in my opinion, corporate communications representatives are often some of the last to know about major company initiatives that are about to take place. And if they’re the last to know, well, you can imagine how far down the information ladder consultants at PR firms might be. This poses an obvious problem for company spokespeople. On the one hand, if a reporter comes to them with a question – even if it’s just a rumor – they’d like to be able to give them something that’s honest, or at the least doesn’t hurt the business or their own reputation (even if that something is saying, “Sorry, we don’t comment on rumors.”). At best, communications professionals should be brought up to speed on corporate developments early, so appropriate messaging can be formed. If that doesn’t happen, a company runs the risk of having erroneous information reported – and that doesn’t benefit anyone.

To be clear, the spokesperson used as an example in the Business Insider story should have probably not responded, or at the very least made sure they had their facts straight before stating an unequivocal “no.” But the point remains: CEOs and C-suite , your PR people are there to positively enhance public awareness about your company. They’re not going to jeopardize a major deal or product launch intentionally, or harm your businesses’ reputation, but not having all the facts makes it difficult for them to achieve their goals…which just so happen to be your goals as well.

 -- Pete Larmey

What does social media say about Americans?

It’s no surprise that American’s love social media sites. I personally have a profile on LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter and Google +. But what do we as American’s like to use these social sites to do and say? I came across the infographic below that is based on a study done by social media strategy firm Hasai. It both caught my attention and managed to amuse me a bit with the results of what exactly social media tells us about American society.


Possibly the most surprising finding is the amount of people that seem to use “Tagged,” a social network which focuses on having it’s members meet new people through social games, friend suggestions, browsing profiles, group interests. Before today, I had never heard of the site, so I was a little surprised that it came in second as the most logged in to network behind Facebook.
Also surprising/amusing is the fact that North Dakota is the most social state. While I would not have guessed that was the case, the more I thought about it – is there really that much else to do in North Dakota? (Sorry North Dakota – I kid!). And perhaps the most amusing finding of all? 63 million active users spend an average of 15 minutes a day playing Farmville! That is a lot of fake chicken coops.


Clients – listen up! While it may seem as though Americans primarily use social networking sites to communicate with friends and colleagues, and to follow celebrities, according to this study, 4 out of 10 Americans on social media platforms are following products, services and brands. Considering that over half of all Americans are on at least one social network, that is a hefty amount of people who may be checking out your brand.


So after looking at the infographic, are there any stats that jump out at you?


-Kathryn

The Future of Mobile Advertising

Last week, I was standing in a retail store contemplating whether or not to buy the adorable, yet over-priced Ella Moss dress I had recently fallen in love with. After struggling with the choice for quite sometime, I put it back in its spot on the rack and tried to walk away. Just then, I received an email on my phone. To distract myself from the pain of leaving the perfect fall silk tie dress behind, I checked it immediately. To my surprise, the email was from the exact store I was currently standing in – with an advertisement for 20% off my purchase.  And to think, I was considering paying full price!


I recently came across a blog post announcing a new study which states that “Mobile Users' Interests Trump Location For Ads” and thought back to my experience.  Perhaps it wasn’t sheer coincidence that I had received an ad for a store I frequently follow while I was in local proximity.   It is almost frightening that advertisers are constantly sorting through loads of real-time data to target their perfect consumer.  However, since this incident I have been paying closer attention to advertisements I receive.  They are almost never spam and almost always about a product or service I have been actively researching or monitoring or have opted into receiving information about their services.  It is possible that advertisements are becoming more helpful and less of a menace? 

Check out some of the interesting stats from the study:

•    60% of smartphone users polled said they would rather get offers tailored to their interests;
•    17% preferred ads based on time of day;
•    14% by location and;
•    10% wanted ads suited to their lifestyle.

TV is getting involved with mobile advertising, too! Read more about it: Television's Next Frontier: Mobile

-Kate Nesbitt

Public Relations Lessons Courtesy of Tommy Gavin

If you’ve ever done a media interview, and wondered why your PR rep insists on being on the phone or being present, I’m going to share a story with you that highlights exactly why we are there. Granted, this story centers around the fictional character Tommy Gavin from the TV show “Rescue Me,” it’s still a good lesson in why we are there, silently in the background.


***Spoiler Alert – I’m going to briefly recap part of episode 4 of season 7 of “Rescue Me.” ***

Tommy Gavin, a foul-mouthed, alcoholic member of the FDNY is not one to shy away from controversy. He speaks his mind with no regard for whom he might hurt. However, when the women in his life (his wife, his ex-mistress) and his crew convince him to participate in a TV interview honoring some of the hero’s of 9/11 (i.e., members of the FDNY who gave their lives that day) Tommy is rightfully skeptical. However, the firefighter he’s supposed to memorialize is his best friend and cousin (the dead husband of his ex-mistress).


The interview starts out fine enough. Questions are on target and Tommy’s playing nice (or as nice as Tommy Gavin can). Then things start to take a turn for the worse. The reporter starts to go off script. Suddenly she’s asking questions that have nothing to do with Tommy’s deceased cousin or 9/11. Tommy, in true Tommy fashion, goes off on the reporter – speaking his mind, giving her and the camera the middle finger and ultimately raising the ire of headquarters once the piece aired.

Now here’s my question. If everyone knows Tommy is a loose cannon, why did no one step in to stop the interview? The rest of his crew stood back and watched. Nobody intervened. Additionally, if this interview was cleared by headquarters why oh why was there no public relations or public affairs rep on site? Someone should have stepped in to stop the interview. Someone should have noticed the reporter was going off script, asking questions irrelevant to the story they were doing, and intervened. 

This is why we, your public relations reps, are there, silently (and sometimes not so silently) in the background. We’re there to make sure the interview goes smoothly. To make sure the interviewer and interview stay on track. And lastly, we’re there to intervene if and when it’s necessary to protect not only your reputation, but also the organization you ultimately represent.

 --Jennifer

Gorilla Marketing

Note:  Image copyright 2011 20th Century Fox

This pastweekend I went to see Rise of the Planetof the Apes.  I’ve been a big fan ofthe films since I was a kid, so even in the middle of packing for a move,heading out to the theater on opening weekend was a no-brainer for me. 

Is Google + Already a Minus?

Earlierthis week Federal Computer News ran an interesting story headlined “3Reasons You Can Ignore Google+.”  The article pointedout that, in its second week in operation, Google+ traffic declined somewhatsignificantly, from 1.86 million visitors to 1.76 million.  The reporter drew several conclusions fromthe decline:  that the service is facingstiff (perhaps insurmountable) competition from Facebook, it’s notsignificantly different in any meaningful way, and – foremost – that people aresimply suffering from “social media fatigue.”